Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 72796 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2010 18:11:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 18 Aug 2010 18:11:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 71671 invoked by uid 500); 18 Aug 2010 18:11:52 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 71598 invoked by uid 500); 18 Aug 2010 18:11:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 71590 invoked by uid 99); 18 Aug 2010 18:11:51 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:11:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of timelessness@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.169] (HELO mail-yx0-f169.google.com) (209.85.213.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 18:11:30 +0000 Received: by yxs7 with SMTP id 7so372627yxs.14 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:11:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=C0o6ERUDAf96nG5RkC2t24r5TslsHO3hn+gyWiFHu10=; b=UD639cIowVXK+RIwzCHDYibWcz72sB4smBry1I9IWjsb32vZEGduPkvCMZfqb0z4Dz yfPQPEc/SvDzha1w6VuwpDNErRtfALdE22NaepeWlXFpfQJjJCgjYfzf7vaz0GnjZJG1 DiQruYc/35W4gp1tCyrKF8+Gbww3WUL/FYnTw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=gUoKu/dJYgYG778AzSktUQvwJzyCxSICJw/lFHXhpRfFv+P45x2DCu+sxxgAB0yRUq 0PxHlngnHmlIWSNW8AiFCcFqMSMUUA7mUynNn9tgPBa9xRpp3mOG4kH5tznL0SJST/Yg DNlRjlVUDZQkKNjttj+yKdvRRf79b1+jEgmmU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.68.6 with SMTP id q6mr843014yba.196.1282155068948; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.150.8 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <974030.80769.qm@web50305.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <974030.80769.qm@web50305.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:11:08 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: major differences with Cassandra From: Time Less To: user@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd593d66e80ed048e1cfd39 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --000e0cd593d66e80ed048e1cfd39 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 HBase is run by persons who understand (or are willing to hear) the operational requirements of distributed databases in high-volume environments, whereas the Cassandra project isn't. Talks about technical differences are really noise, because they're entirely theoretical. When viewed with this knowledge, a lot of the disagreements, flamewars, and shoutfests begin to make sense. As of today, I'm unaware of any major feature Cassandra claims that it actually delivers outside of installations run by the developers themselves. Specifically: multi-DC, hinted handoff, compaction, dynamic cluster resizing are all fail. The developers will adamantly claim all such features work just fine. Good luck getting any of it to work in YOUR environment. In stark contrast, I am intimately familiar with at least one large HBase installation run by non-developers (at Mozilla). Disclaimers: I am very familiar with the Cassandra product internals, developers, history, and community. I am less familiar with HBase. I might therefore have a rosy view of the HBase community based on ignorance. Also, in a low-volume environment, pretty much anything works. Including Cassandra. Or anything else. Any NoSQL. Any SQL. Pick whatever you want and run with it. On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Otis Gospodnetic < otis_gospodnetic@yahoo.com> wrote: > I don't have the URL handy, but just the other day I read some > Cassandra/HBase > blog post where Cassandra was described as having no SPOF, but somebody > left > some very "strong comments" calling out that and a few other claims as > false. > Ah, I remember, here is the URL: > > http://blog.mozilla.com/data/2010/05/18/riak-and-cassandra-and-hbase-oh-my/ > > > Otis---- > Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch > Hadoop ecosystem search :: http://search-hadoop.com/ > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Jeff Zhang > > To: user@hbase.apache.org > > Sent: Thu, July 8, 2010 1:34:18 AM > > Subject: Re: major differences with Cassandra > > > > HBase do not have super column family. > > > > And I can list the following major difference between hbase and > cassandra ( > > welcome any supplement) : > > > > 1. HBase is master-slave architecture, while cassandra has no master, > and > > you can consider it as p2p structure, and it has no single point of > failure. > > 2. HBase is strong consistency while cassandra is eventual consistency > > (although you can tune it to be strong consistency) > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 1:26 PM, S Ahmed wrote: > > > > > Hello! > > > > > > I was hoping some has experiences with both Cassandra and HBase. > > > > > > What are the major differences between Cassandra and HBase? > > > > > > Does HBase have the concept of ColumnFamilies and SuperColumnFamilies > like > > > Cassandra? > > > > > > Where in the wiki does it go over designing a data model? > > > > > > > > > thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best Regards > > > > Jeff Zhang > > > -- timeless(ness) --000e0cd593d66e80ed048e1cfd39--